Today, the government presented the budget bill for 2021. The budget contains a number of initiatives that affect and affect Sweden's students. SFS 'overall assessment is that even though much more needs to be done, the budget contains the majority of investments that are positive and that will provide greater opportunities to continue the work so that all students have a good study situation.
The biggest news is that the state subsidy to student unions will be increased by 25 million. An increase that is lower than what SFS worked for but a step in the right direction and a gratifying message. The student movement has been pushing this issue for many years and it is a great success that this now looks to be a reality.
The proposals that stand out and SFS 'comment in brief are:
- SEK 25 million more for student influence!
- 18 new fully funded training places. SFS views positively that the university is expanding, but negatively that the places do not fit within the regular dimensioning system.
- Lifelong learning is no longer performance-based and higher education institutions receive grants even if students do not take their credits. SFS is positive and sees that in the future this should apply to all education.
- Investment support for housing for students is increased. SFS is positive about this.
- Student aid is counted up and the supplementary loan is increased. SFS sees that much more can be done here.
- Resources for student health. SFS is positive but sees a great need for more long-term work to promote students' mental health and work environment.
- Support to the Gender Equality Authority to work with gender equality at universities and colleges. SFS is positive and hopes this can lead to increased work with the university's gender equality work.
- Hollowing out, the appropriations need to be counted up so as not to erode. SFS is concerned that the productivity deduction is increasing
- The research and innovation bill has become relatively large and we follow the development of its more detailed content closely
Below, we comment on these points in more depth by going into what the exact proposals mean and where SFS stands on the issue.
25 million more for student influence
The state subsidy for student influence is proposed to increase by 25 million by 2021 and thereafter by 20 million in the coming years. SFS has long pursued this issue as we have never before seen a level increase in government grants since the union bond was abolished in 2010. The issue has also been further raised during the current corona pandemic when student influence has had to be conducted at a distance, which has been a major challenge for several student unions around the country. which already in the initial situation had strained resources.
SFS had wanted to see a larger increase and advocates the line recommended by UKÄ with a tripling or quadrupling of the state subsidy. However, we understand that the government in these times needs to have a strict priority and we therefore see this increase of about 75% as gratifying and a big step in the right direction. Sweden's student unions now have a stronger opportunity to continue their work to provide Sweden's students with a better education and an improved study situation in a more equal and independent way.
18 more training places
The government has previously announced that the number of training places will increase. It is partly part of a long-term ambition, and partly part of special initiatives to meet the demand for higher education that followed the corona pandemic. SFS is positive about this and it is positive that the places are fully financed, which was not a guarantee before the budget release today.
In total, the appropriations will increase by SEK 1,7 billion to finance 18 new training places next year. The distribution between different educations is illustrated by the number of places in the following table:
(Table from the Budget Bill 2021, heading 16, p. 151)
The largest expansion of 5200 training places is focused on training for the shortage forces. The expansion in this category has in recent years included "Nursing educations, preschool teacher education and teacher educations, engineering educations and educations of importance for the community building" and later also the medical educations. There is also a general expansion for higher education to be available throughout the country, it includes 1920 places. In addition, there is a permanent expansion of the vocational teacher educations and the supplementary pedagogical education.
In order to meet the increased demand in connection with corona, two temporary expansions are also being made. This applies to further education at the advanced level, which is being expanded by 4 places and an increase in base years by 100 places.
SFS sees it as a natural measure that the university is expanded during a time of economic crisis when more people apply for higher education. However, SFS believes that it is risky for the state to directly direct investments in which educational places are to be provided and prefers that the higher education institutions' ceiling amounts be raised in general. The ordinary dimensioning system, which is based on students' demand, generally works well to meet society's needs. If the state or other actors want more people to study for a certain profession, it is better to first increase the profession's attractiveness and the quality of education and then dimension proportionally to application pressure instead of artificially increasing the amount of study places for a certain profession.
Lifelong learning is no longer performance-based
Part of the expansion is new for this year and deserves a separate comment. This applies to an increase in the number of places in the category "lifelong learning".
Lifelong learning is formally not a separate category of education, but most often refers to the type of education that is given in the evening, part-time or distance and is therefore easier to combine with being a professional. The educations can traditionally occur in all subjects and be applied for by anyone. However, it is common for them to have a lower throughput because many professionals do not prioritize taking the exams even if they undergo the training itself. Traditionally, however, this means that higher education institutions do not receive the same compensation for this type of course, which creates a negative incentive.
Here is an interesting news in this year's budget. The grants for lifelong learning programs will be paid out in full regardless of whether the students take their credits. In this way, the current biggest obstacle to arranging education for lifelong learning is removed. This is how the government writes about the initiative:
“The investment in lifelong learning proposed in this bill means that the amount of compensation that universities and colleges receive per full-time student corresponds to the level that a higher education institution is normally allowed to charge for both full-time students and full-year achievement within the basic and advanced level. This is considered important for the investment to be able to contribute to creating more opportunities for adjustment and further education for people who are in the middle of life. ”
Budget Bill 2021, Expenditure area 16
SFS is very positive about the performance-based part of the grants disappearing. If we are to be critical of anything, it is that the same change could have been applied to all educational grants for all students. We understand, however, that they would then constitute a major reform that would require a more comprehensive impact assessment and consultation round. We hope that initiatives in this direction will be included in the research bill later this year.
Investment support for housing for students
The government will increase investment support for the construction of rental housing and housing for students from the current SEK 7,5 billion to SEK 9,3 billion for 2021. Thereafter, it will increase by SEK 1,1 billion by 2022 and thereafter SEK 1,9 billion in 2023. Since the investment support was introduced in 2016, just over SEK 12 billion was granted for approximately 35 homes at relatively lower rents than would have been the case without the investment support. The continued investment of a total of 800 billion until 12,3 means in a rough estimate that approximately the same number of homes built between 2023-2016 (exceptions from 2020 when the support was removed) should be able to be built from 2019 to 2021.
SFS views this very positively. Investment support is an important measure to increase the construction of rental apartments that students can afford to demand. The Government's investment until 2023 will hopefully mean that construction does not slow down despite the current economic situation and that the housing shortage in many places of study will decrease in the long run.
Student aid
The Government proposes a new section in the Student Aid Act to increase the supplementary loan in the event of extraordinary events in peacetime. Additional loans can be granted to students over the age of 25 who have had a certain income from work before the start of their studies, or are granted to the student who has certain additional costs in connection with their studies. SFS is positive about this.
In addition to this, the study funds for 2021 will be increased slightly as a result of the price base amount being calculated, which means an increase from the current SEK 10 to SEK 860 for four weeks of full-time studies. SFS thinks it is positive that the study grant is not eroded. However, SFS would have liked to have seen a general increase in the study grant, as we know that many students have a hard time getting their finances together. Many who previously were dependent on extra income from work during the semester or summer jobs, and who have not had that opportunity since the outbreak of the corona pandemic, have now found it extra tough financially.
SFS had generally wanted an increase in the grant part of the student grant, as we know that the recruitment effect of the student grant is absent in certain groups who are afraid of taking out large loans. It would also mean an increased incentive to study the educations that often lead to work with relatively lower wages, for example the shortages we see today in school, care and nursing that the government announces as the "shortage". SFS would also have liked to see the number of weeks to be able to receive study grants increase from the current 240 to 320 weeks, in order to adapt the support to the fact that the educations have become longer with the Bologna process. We would also have liked to see the grant and loan part separated and consumed separately, so that it becomes possible to dispose of your study funds more freely and, for example, be able to take the grant part without consuming the loan part.
Increased resources for student health care
“The government wants to strengthen student health as a preventive measure so that all students can feel safe during their studies. The investment means that the government directs funds to increase the ambition for student health. From 2021, SEK 25 million is proposed to strengthen student health, prevent mental and physical ill-health and contribute to a better study environment. The investment can especially benefit students who are not used to studying. ”
Budget Bill 2021, Expenditure area 16
It is clear that many students have had a difficult time during the corona pandemic. Many educations have been placed at a distance and many student unions experience that the problems with loneliness have increased. More and more people are also experiencing concern, both to cope with the education and to what the future will look like if the corona pandemic is followed by a recession. It is good that students who experience loneliness, stress and anxiety have somewhere to turn. There, student health plays an extremely important role.
However, we want to put a stop to too one-sided efforts to support students only when they feel bad. The long-term work must be preventive and take place systematically in the educations themselves. It is about coming to terms with the type of unclear requirements, lack of support and fierce competition that makes some educations block the risk of mental illness among students. Here, too, student health care has an important role to play, but it cannot replace systematic work environment work in higher education.
During the autumn, the University Chancellor's Office will report on an assignment in which they investigate the role of student health. Hopefully, they will clarify how student health should contribute to the systematic work environment work in higher education. During the autumn, the government will also present a new work environment strategy. In order for the work with the students' mental health to develop, it is important that the students are clearly stated in that strategy.
Support for increased gender equality within the university
In the budget, it is proposed that five million go to the Gender Equality Authority to support universities and colleges' work with gender mainstreaming.
SFS believes that there are shortcomings in gender equality at the university. For example, it is clear that there are hidden screening mechanisms that make it more difficult for women to pursue careers in academia. Among new students, there are more women than men, but among the employed teaching and research staff, 46% are women and 54% men. Among professors, however, the proportion of women is only 29%. (https://www.uka.se/om-oss/aktuellt/nyheter/2019-05-07-andelen-kvinnliga-professorer-har-okat-till-29-procent.html)
Many universities and colleges take this seriously and actively try to remove the obstacles that currently screen women out of academia, but many obstacles are hidden and the preventive work requires good knowledge of the mechanisms that need to be addressed. For example, there is a documented bias that causes the research community to make a more negative assessment of scientific articles if they have been written by a female researcher compared to if the same article is presented by a male researcher. This type of unconscious discrimination is difficult to overcome. Therefore, it is important that an expert authority provides the higher education institutions with support to develop this work.
SFS is therefore positive that the government is strengthening the conditions for gender mainstreaming. We hope that further investments in gender equality and recruitment goals will be included in the research bill.
Erosion of Higher Education Funding
A recurring issue in the budget context concerns the increase in appropriations to compensate for increases in salaries and other costs. If the appropriations are not calculated as the higher education institutions' costs for premises and staff increase, the same appropriations in nominal terms would mean that the activities in the long run need to be cut. The appropriations in the state budget are therefore calculated every year, but it is often a problem that the increase does not follow the actual price development, and in the long run this leads to an erosion.
In one of the introductory chapters of the budget (https://www.regeringen.se/4a6921/contentassets/bc0f4b1a4ce844f2aa59949d09c93f29/forslag-till-statens-budget-for-2021-finansplan-och-skattefragor-kapitel-1-13-bilagor-1-17.pdf) there is a table showing the general increases for the entire state budget:
The conversion for wages is 1,25%. In fact, it would have had to amount to 2,72% to correspond to the wage increases in the labor market (labor cost index) But due to a general saving of 1,47% in the state budget in the form of a productivity deduction then the enumeration is lower. It thus constitutes a general saving in the state budget, a so-called "cheese planer". Exactly how the various appropriations then change is also affected by how much of the various operations' costs are to go to staff, premises and other things.
For the university area, the savings are lower. Education grants are increased by 1,72% (expenditure area 16, p. 150. It is thus approximately 1% unit lower than the labor cost index, which is 2,72%.
Although universities and colleges not only have salary costs, but also local costs that have a different enumeration, we see that the productivity deduction roughly amounts to 1%. It is thus lower than other parts of the state budget. Nevertheless, this year corresponds to SEK 514 million in savings on the direct grants for education and research. In addition, there are savings for the state research funders etc. It may be worth remembering, even if the investments in this year's budget are larger.
Although the productivity deduction can now be considered an integral part of the state budget process for redistribution between budget expenditures and for creating “room for reform”, we want to be careful to flag what this leads to consequences. We see this, for example, when it comes to more training places. More places but fewer resources per place and a strictly increasing number of degree objectives have been mantra for about 25 years. This leads to each educational institution receiving lower quality every year and to the state taking on greater and greater responsibility for how resources are to be distributed instead of expert authorities themselves doing so. It is also depressing that research is continuously gaining more real resources while education is constantly losing resources in real terms.
The Research and Innovation Bill
The research and innovation policy bill (the research plug) lays the foundation for the higher education sector's conditions for the next four years. This is done by announcing total levels of how much the state's research investments can be expected to increase and by directing research to certain areas. The total levels for the coming years can be summed up as follows:
- 2021: SEK 3,4 billion
- 2022: SEK 3,2 billion
- 2023: SEK 3,3 billion
- 2024: SEK 3,7 billion
This is a relatively large research plug, which can be justified, among other things, by the fact that companies are less inclined to invest in research projects, which leads to the state having to cover for these losses. The research plug will be presented in its entirety to the Riksdag in November if everything goes according to plan, but is already very much announced.
The government has previously announced a number of major areas for investment as follows:
- Initiatives to defend Sweden as a leading research nation
- Strengthening funding for the Swedish Research Council as well as targeted investments and other basic research
- Investment in research infrastructure
- Increased basic funding for universities and colleges
- Investment in centers of excellence
- Investment in graduate school for folk high school teachers
- Strengthening financial market research
Here, SFS is mainly satisfied that the higher education institutions receive increased basic funding. This is something that the Board and Resource Inquiry proposes and is good for reducing the enormous pressure that exists on teachers in higher education to withdraw external funds. This will hopefully enable research and education to be better linked, but it also depends to a large extent on how the higher education institutions distribute their resources internally.
The budget bill that is now being presented also makes a number of other clarifications concerning the focus of the research plug:
- Strategic initiatives to meet societal challenges
- The societal challenge climate and environment
- The societal challenge health and welfare
- The societal challenge competence supply and adjustment
- The societal challenge of digitalisation
- The societal challenge of a democratic and strong society
- Research infrastructures for new breakthroughs and innovations
- Free research must be safeguarded
- The central role of colleges and universities in building society
The above areas are most to be expected as several of them are related to previous research bills that will run over the term of office. Something that is interesting is that it is mentioned that "free research should be given priority", which possibly implies that all research is not free, even though it is stated in the constitution that all research should be free.
There are many things we want to see in the forthcoming research policy bill. Among other things, we would like to see more parts from the Board and Resource Inquiry included, not least that allocation after full-year performance is removed. We also believe that increased investments in higher education pedagogical development, gender equality and research on mental health are of great importance. Doctoral students whose research and postgraduate education have been delayed due to the corona pandemic must also be given increased opportunities for prolongation. We also want to point out that higher education must not be reduced to a mere means of skills supply and innovation, although they are also of course important, but that the educational offer as a whole provides opportunities for innovation and education for students and in the long run the country's inhabitants.
On the whole, the balance between education and research must also improve, right now we have a funding system that continuously increases research resources while education is allowed to become smaller and smaller with each passing year. We also believe that it is important for the state to take long-term discussions about the challenges of higher education and not just research. The current policy regarding higher education is easily short-term based on different actors' priority areas for each year and the state should facilitate a joint discussion about what challenges we should work on together between each plug.